tv [untitled] October 8, 2011 5:30pm-6:00pm PDT
to allow them to not be part of the herd, so to speak, under pressure, as a staff with at the time necessary to walk them through what can be very daunting process. i have a four plan and a map of where the services occur. since it is not a simple square or rectangle and there is a disconnect between service areas, a map would be very helpful. we would like to include that in the package for customers. additional sign it right now, it would go a long ways in directing customers who have not been here before too not wander
in the wrong direction. also, another suggestion i had more combat a programs related. if our plan review provider is able to service customers who have been there for an extended period time, the idea was perhaps flashes that were read. the point is to bring attention to staff to deal with that, or supervisors, to see what we can do, to make adjustments, if necessary, to employ additional resources. with that, i am open to any questions commissioners might have.
>> thank you. of like to thank you and the acting director for kicks starting this. i had been pretty skeptical with all of these different departments. but you somewhat convinced me the other day that you could probably iron out all of this. also, this system will be shellshocked to a lot of people when they first come in there. they will be screaming and kicking. they are not going to like it. the part that i like about it is that it will identify people in this department also.
people over the last year or two. one is producing more than the other, this system will identify who is producing into is not. we will have to get a report on that and that's why. i am pleasantly optimistic that we can implement this. it annoys me a bit that we have had this for so long and dragged our butts without getting going, so i commend you for getting it going. >> i know that this has been a project that the director and staff have been working on for a long time. the details have been very important. it is good to see all of this
falling in line. one of the things that i've brought up was the ability for the q-matic to record needed information into the tracking system. to save keystrokes, if nothing else. if the project leaves its station, the q-matic, it would be nice to have it record that into the system. it may be that it can serve as an audit on a daily basis. not just a number of products -- projects that the station has, but you need to look at extending the projects that people are doing in the station. i do not necessarily think that the number of permits issued to
a certain station should be an indicator of whether they are doing a good job or not. projects, in that are more complicated. i think that how we have laid out the department now is really good. i think that the >> q-matic -- -- q-matic will help. silage should be above all i level. whenever the silage, it should be viewable from far away. you cannot see through people to see them, so hopefully we can get some help to identify the station and put the q-matic
signs up. i appreciate the work that you're doing in the stead of our director, was off on medical leave, stepping in with these projects is really important. thank you for the work you are doing. >> i want to congratulate you and the department. i think that this system will go a long way to address several issues. the chief being everything transparent. everything time. keeping the process moving, so to speak. reducing waste, it will help management, you see, with what is going on. we will learn about how things are going on in certain sections. but will not go so far to say that this will show where we are not performing.
it may show them what we need in terms of resources as well. for that, in the stem that there may be some great group of customers that might be used to the old way of doing things. i hope that they will keep an open mind, open their eyes, seeing that this is good for the entire industry. meaning that they will no longer have to say that i need to do this and this, they can said that they will be treated the same way, and fairly, moving through the system quickly. so, thank you. >> i really appreciate the discussion as well. and the introduction by also appreciate the way that the department went about implementing it, even if it was slower than what we wanted.
a think that was very informational for me. that is maybe not the way it was set up in other cities. we heard about that from different advisory board people who came to that meeting. that is the way san francisco is. when the walked into that building, there was innovation with planning, the fire department, puc, multiple things. we're trying to do it right the first time. i do want to echo the thing about the data. i would appreciate having a look at that. maybe not so much as other commissioners have said looking at performance by our staff, but also what we need. if we need more staff, we can go to the mayor's office and human resources and say this is where the gridlock is. we could use more, with averages. to me, the date that is not only something the staff should be
added thing. this is where we could go and ask for more. we need more help in these areas. so i think the data is going to be a real plus for us. i was wondering that hopefully the step will keep us informed. it starts in october. within a couple of months of the new year, we will start being able to look at that data. >> i would also like to commend both acting director sweeney and the staff that basically made this happen. it has been far too long that it took, but at the same time we are here now. the category of the metrics this provides is on the staff and technology that brings us up to speed. it will help with the work flow.
it is good for the public and staff. that, the challenge will be the acceptance of staff and the public on certain sectors. but i think let us give it the due process and do time to see if it does work. also, hoping to navigate the coordination of multiple departments is point to be huge. also, the metric of tracking it all the way through is going to be good. but we need some tweaking that will happen along the way. one of those i see it right off the bat is the multiple permits, especially on the category of windows, where at times applying for multiple permits and, all of the windows are basically all metal or a category that does not fit in certain types of buildings. it would not be appropriate i
think that is something to really flag, if it flags that a metal window does not go into a historical building it should raise that as a red flag. all told, i am just elated that we are finally here. >> i would like to say one more thing. i would like the director to direct that it is brought to the meeting and let the stake holders get their feedback on this. at the end of the day, they are the ones who are paying the bill. >> thank you very much. >> commissioners, thank you for the sentiments. i think staff appreciates those sentiments. we are looking forward to utilizing as a management tool to do some long-range planning, strategic planning, founded on
the demand for our services, and not just, right now, doing with clipboards and having a staff member just how things with checkmarks and stuff. it is cumbersome. it is not accurate. hopefully this system will be accurate. it would give us the data on the spot for providing services that can be adjusted as the demand changes from day to day and hour to hour. in terms of additional staff for justification, i think this is the kind of data we need to develop to support, especially requests for clerks. i know in the past it has been difficult for our customers, who have had a long day and have had a difficult time paying for their services. it takes time. there are multiple departments to collect fees for. it is a longer process than
simply collecting one check or credit card action. it does take a lot of work from our clerks. they are always under the gun. so we appreciate the sentiments from the commissioners. thank you very much. >> item eight e, update on other technology projects. >> we have been doing some web enhancements. we now have plumbing inspection scheduling on line. we have a soft relief -- release of permits to activate boilers. we are working on the program to schedule electrical inspections over the web. we are working on the testing for requesting 3r over the web.
we are also working on what we call our server refresh project. that is a project we budgeted for in this fiscal year, because most of our servers are going to be out of useful life at the end of this year, this calendar year. we are working with the department of technology on getting approval to replace those. we are working on a project with the treasure tax collector on replacement of our cash management system. this will hopefully speed up the time it takes to use the existing cash register system to hopefully speed up that process, so that maybe it can reduce the amount of time it takes for our customers to pay. we are continuing to do a
refresh of our pc's. we have a replacement plan in our department. we got behind on that because of funding, but we have about 80% of its complete and are in the final 20%. we have ongoing projects. one is with the department of technology and other entities that use the addressing system, having that integrate with our addressing system. also, puc wants us to do some programming to incorporate some of their ordinances into our permitting process. we continue to work on other projects other than the permit tracking system in terms of our technology. president hechanova: thank you. >> thanks. >> item eight f, update on new
hires. >> commissioner sweeney, acting director. since july 2011, we have hired approximately 22 -- we fired for it -- we have hired 14 new employees. we have eight under recruitment. the 14 we hired, eight would be clerks, three inspectors, one engineer, one of the secretary, and one administrative analyst. the eight positions we are currently under recruitment, three are engineers. one is an electrical inspector. one is business analysis. one is senior account clerk. a project manager and an account in turn. they are all in various stages of being hired. any questions? >> what about mechanical engineer? >> that would be one of the engineers we are talking about.
the 52 07 -- there are too mechanical engineers. the other is -- the 5207, there are two mechanical engineers. at the end of october, there will be another list and we will have more people to pick from. >> if they were to be hired, will they come on board in october? is that the portal? >> the 207's, the interviews have already occurred. so six weeks. the hardest thing is to get the interview and get the list. president hechanova: thank you. >> is the public comment on the director's report, items eight a through f th?
seeing none, item nine, commissioners' questions and matters. at this time, commissioners may make inquiries to staff the regarding documents and procedures of interest to the commission. >> if somebody applies for a permit to do foundation termite work, which is very common after a termite inspection, why does the planning department get a big portion of that feat? they do not seem to do anything. i did not want to ask that question when there are people here who would not know. maybe you know. >> i would venture that it would have to do with stucco repair, so it is visible from the street. therefore, it would have to go under the planning review, probably in the first floor,
straight over the counter. >> could you maybe do a little research on that and a more definitive answer maybe next time? thanks. >> item eight b, future meetings are agendas. the commission might take action to set the date of a special meeting or determine items that could be placed on the agendas of future meetings of the building inspection commission. the next regularly scheduled meeting is october 19. >> i really would like to get a constant update from the caps extension. we have important programs and other relevant stuff that need to be ongoing. i think the more that we can find out what is up --
>> they are not under our jurisdiction anymore. >> request it. we are all working together. we also have the standards of repair. there is a lot of stuff that is still loose ends of the caps work we did. i think the more that we have them tell us about it, the more we will be ready for it. thank you. >> is there anything else to add for the future meeting or business? as i mentioned, the next meeting is october 19. is there public comment on item nine a or b? seeing none, item 10, review and approval of the meetings -- of the minutes of the regular meeting of february 16, 2011. >> move to approve. >> are all on favor -- are all
in favor? the minutes are approved. item 11, review and approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of march 16, 2011. >> move to approve. >> second. >> public comment? there is no public. >> aye. i also want to thank you for catching up on those minutes. i know we are behind and it is a hassle. thank you very much. >> item 12, adjournment. is there a motion to adjourn? >> i will make that motion. >> i will second that. aye. >> now adjourned, 1:13 pm >> where is our trash can?
♪ >> i am mellisa griffin, a columnist and member of the san francisco league of women voters. i am here is city hall with the league and sfgtv to discuss prop h that will be on this year's november ballot. ♪ >> prop h would make it official city policy to encourage the san francisco unified school district to establish certain priorities for assigning students to specific schools. currently, parents may apply for their children to attend any school in the school district. if a school does not have space for all applicants, the school
district and immense students based on certain priorities, such as whether they're older siblings attend the same school, whether the student lives in the schools attendance area, or whether the students elementary school is a designated feeder school for the middle school. prop h when they get city policy to encourage the school district to ensure that all students have the opportunity to attend a quality neighborhood school. after signing siblings to the same school, the highest priority should be to assign each student to the schools close to their homes. finally, the school district should provide students with the opportunity to attend schools with language immersion rather special programs, even if those schools are not close to their homes. ♪ i am here with kris miller, chairperson of students first, a group that sponsored prop h. ms. miller, thank you for being
here. why should voters vote for prop h? >> for starters, the reason that prop h was adopted to begin with is roughly 14,000 signatures from san francisco county voters that also, as i do, feel passionately about children being able to attend schools near their neighborhoods. it makes sense. everyone automatically assumes that the child attends a school near their neighborhood or has that option in san francisco. as we know, from previous policies in different things with in government here, san francisco is special. san francisco is definitely special in this respect, that we have not followed suit with many of the major metropolitan cities and allow parents the right to automatically opt into their neighborhood schools. san francisco has been having issues with this policy for years. there are thousands of parents who have left the city, over 5000 since the 2000 census. since the mid-1960s, we have lost a little under half of our student population.
this is one of the major reasons why. prop h is basically simply proposing that parents or children within certain neighborhood school areas are given the option of sending their children to the school in closest proximity to their home. that is all we are proposing, nothing more. just that within the current citywide lottery system, that parents are given the option of sending their children to school near their home, as opposed to being bussed across town, where were the district decides the children will go. that is basically the premise of prop h. >> opponents have argued that the current school assignment system does give substantial weight to a child's geographic location when deciding -- one assigning the to a school. how do you respond? it's very simply, one, that comment is not factually based.
roughly 30% of parents in the city, according to the school district -- we're not sure if these are accurate numbers, a roughly 30% of the parents in the san francisco unified school district are opting to send their children to their neighborhood schools. for some reason, they're not able to honor that. a seemingly small number of parents. the fourth consideration -- out of four considerations for the placement system, never the proximity is the fourth. in most cases, within many different school districts, it does not come into consideration because the schools are full of the time to get to that proximity consideration. not only that, but that is only for elementary school placement. in middle school and high school, this consideration has been completely taken away. there's absolutely no consideration whatsoever. it is a citywide lottery system period. so that statement is not true.
i just gave you the facts. if you want to look it up on iran, it is right on the website -- if you want to look it up on your own. >> it is argued that keeping children in their neighborhoods will lead to gentrification in san francisco. how do you respond? >> i will tell you what it will actually lead to from the actual perspective, not from a hypothetical perspective that is not based on this a big numbers. if you look at the statistics, from the current policies, they do not focus heavily on a neighborhood school-based placement system. in the last 10 years, we have moved further and further towards segregation within our school district. the interesting thing is, the current system does not focus heavily on neighborhood school proximity, and the reason for that is to keep the school ever spent to give children more opportunity in areas and better performing schools that would not otherwise have the opportunity to go to a higher
performing schools. right now, we actually have a huge issue with schools re segregating in the last 10 years. if the current policies are re segregating the schools in san francisco, one would assume that parents and voters in the city would vote to change that policy. if we are asking for the opposite of what they are, presumably we are going to be either improving the situation, are in the worst-case scenario it will stay the same. so that allegation makes no sense from a fact-based perspective. >> thank you so much, ms. miller. next, we will hear from an opponent of prop h. ♪ i am now with rachel from the san francisco board of education. the board of education recently voted unanimously to oppose prop h. thank you for being here. why do you oppose prop h? >> for several reasons.
first, it is not well-written, and has a lot of unintended consequences. primarily, i oppose it because it is a very simplistic way of dealing with a very complex problem. i have been working on student assignment, but as a parent -- for many years, i put my kids through the process. i have talked to parents across the city as a candidate for public office. since i was elected to the board, the board has been the last two years working on a news to defend a policy. it is the most complex problem i have ever worked on in my personal or professional life. and i do not think that is the kind of thing that can be resolved by a voter checking a yes or no on the ballot box. >> recent census numbers show that families with small children have been leaving the city in record numbers because of people would argue that the current school assignment system has something to do with that. do you believe the current system is working? >> i do the the current system is worki